No. 18-298

Michael Vernon Beaty, Jr. v. South Carolina

Lower Court: South Carolina
Docketed: 2018-09-07
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: chapman-standard chapman-v-california constitutional-error criminal-procedure due-process due-process,criminal-procedure,constitutional-law, due-process,criminal-procedure,harmless-error,chap harmless-error judicial-review right-to-respond standard-of-review supreme-court-standard
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2018-10-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the South Carolina Supreme Court's standard for determining harmless constitutional error depart from this Court's mandates in Chapman v. California?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED IL Does the South Carolina Supreme Court’s standard for determining harmless constitutional error depart from this Court’s mandates in Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967)? Il. Does Due Process confer a right for an accused to have a full and fair opportunity to respond to the prosecution’s best closing argument, meaning the State must open in full on the facts and the law and restrict its reply argument to matters raised by the defense in closing?

Docket Entries

2018-10-29
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.
2018-09-26
Waiver of right of respondent STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA to respond filed.
2018-08-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 9, 2018)

Attorneys

MICHAEL VERNON BEATY
E. Charles Grose Jr.The Grose Law Firm, LL C, Petitioner
E. Charles Grose Jr.The Grose Law Firm, LL C, Petitioner
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Susannah Rawl ColeSouth Carolina Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Susannah Rawl ColeSouth Carolina Office of the Attorney General, Respondent